On Wed, Sep 08 2021, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 02:50:59AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 09 2021, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Sep 08 2021, Taylor Blau wrote: >> > >> >> Here is a very small reroll of a couple of patches to make sure that packs are >> >> not read before all of their auxiliary files exist and are moved into place, by >> >> renaming the .idx file into place last. >> >> >> >> New since the original version is a patch to apply similar treatment to >> >> index-pack, as noticed by Peff in [1]. This should be queued before Ævar's >> >> series on top. >> > >> > I read Junio's earlier <xmqq8s063m7m.fsf@gitster.g>[1] as a suggestion >> > that we combine the two into a singe series. I do think that yields a >> > better end-result, in particular your 1/3 is much more readable if the >> > refactoring in my 2/4. >> > >> > I'm mot of the way done with such a rewrite, which also incorporates >> > your suggestion for how to manage memory in rename_tmp_packfile(), but >> > I'll hold of on what you & Junio have to say about next steps before >> > adding to the re-roll competition Junio mentioned... >> > >> > 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqq8s063m7m.fsf@gitster.g >> >> I've got that at >> https://github.com/git/git/compare/master...avar:avar-tb/idx-rename-race-3 > > Beautiful :-). > > I mentioned in my response to [1] that I missed that message when > sending v2 of my series to fix a couple of these races. And I was even > happy to unify our two series, but you did all of the work for me while > I was eating dinner. Thank you! > > I fetched your branch, reviewed, and am happy with the result. So I > would be content to apply my s-o-b to your patches and resubmit them as > a unified series. Sounds good to me, also in particular any typo/grammar etc. fixes to my changes are most welcome, I tend to sneak those in, and any code changes you see fit of course. > But I did wonder if you wanted to include [2] in this series as well. > It's kind of different, but also related enough that it probably makes > sense to just pull it in. So I'm inclined to just do that, unless you > have any objections. In this latest push-out of "next" Junio's merged that one down already, see 1972c5931bb (Merge branch 'ab/reverse-midx-optim' into next, 2021-09-08). So I think at this point it could be built on top of that, but given that the two don't conflict in any way (textually or semantically) it's probably better to base this larger topic on "master" and proceed with them independently. > [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/patch-1.1-366ba928bd-20210908T010743Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/
